[QUOTE]Originally posted by ttb
On the other hand we have "the American soldier" doing his job. Yes, a dangerous job, but a relatively ordinary job at that. And let's be frank, 500 deaths, this ain't Vietnam.

 

I am not anti war - I'm anti Bush.

I have had buisness dealings with Haliburton and I am sure there is kick backs, illigal deals, etc going on there.

Last I checked Sadam didnt ask anyone to come invade his country the reason we ( US tax payer) are spending billions of dollars is that Bush and his gang, and that is what they are a gang, saw and easy mark for some easy money.

And yes i feel that anyone who is not pro war pro Bush is deemed anti american to some if not small degree.

I just feel that America should never invade a country unless that country strikes us first. The proposterous idea that all of the world has to be a democracy because we figure that is how it should be, is insane and against what America was founded for. We need to mind our buisness and stop judging others just becuse we dont agree or understand there culture. Different cultures make this world great and our commercializing of every other country in the name of the dollar is getting out of hand.

By the bush doctarine we should invade several other countrys immediately there "MIGHT" be a threat. Well i hate to break it to everyone the world is a dangerous place and will always be a dangerous place, this is nothing new. The idea that we need govt, to protect all of us is insane, take some personal responsibility and protect yourself. If this keeps up we are going to protect ourselves into communism.

We need to take a hard look back 100 years, most people would last 1 day in 1800's where people dealt with problems and danger everyday and overcame any issues. They did not go running to the govt every time somethiing went wrong.

Oh ya and PS people are suppose to die. Population control is an issue that needs to be addressed.


Well i'll get off my soap box, and no I am not in the NRA and yes i have a proffesional career, so no hillbilly gun toteing uni bomber jokes.

This is serious, we live in a world were America can just invade without the UN becuse we feel threatened, sounds like we are the ones people should be scared of. Isnt this exactly what Sadam did to kuwait, Hitler did to Poland, Japan did to china and so on. Im sure they all felt an iminate threat was at hand too. Its perspective and can go many ways.

Jamie

 

 

Russ: correct me if i am wrong, no one said soldiers were'nt exceptional people doing an awful, and dangerous job, but they are but a cog in the wheel. Also people should not get awards for doing there job IE: Jessica Lynch" we should all be competent adults that do our jobs well or we should be fired. Its like getting an award for taking care of you children. This is what you are suppose to be doing. Get over it.

My concern is why does it have to always be about Americans in many countrys the public encounters more danger then the average US soldier does when they are going shopping.

Also as an ex underwater welder in the oil fields, my life span was a mere 5 years and no one was giving us idiots any awards for doing repairs on off shore rigs under water chemical welding in storms etc.


Im done, I think.

 

[QUOTE]Originally posted by DaveZ

 

I don't think "people like you" means people who are anti-war or anti-Bush or people with dissenting views.

I think "people like you" means uninformed, half informed, and mis-informed people who set out to back up a pre-determined opinion and find only the facts that back up that opinion. Then they publicly declare these half-facts to be the end-all be-all truth as we should know it. There are more than a couple "people like you"s in this thread and my soapbox gets a little taller and harder to climb with every half-a$$ed assumption I read. Oh well. Might as well not even try to get up there. It isn't worth it anyway.

 

I'll be totally honest. I was surprised that Time didn't select Sadaam. Time has not shied away from picking controversial people in the past, because as has been said before, this is not a popularity contest or a vote for Mr. or Miss Congeniality. This mantle is bestowed upon the person or people that most impacted the news in the past year.

That said, as much as I was surprised that they didn't pick the man that is the impetus behind the current military action (well, they SAY the war is over ), I must say that it is far too seldom that our men and women in uniform get the respect and attention they so rightly deserve and I can't say it was a BAD decision.

Some may call the job of the military ordinary, but it's ordinary in the same way that being a fire fighter or a beat cop is ordinary. It's ordinary because so often it happens in the background...not calling attention and not asking to be put in the limelight.

Every once in a while I think it's wholely appropriate to realize that it's not the dollars or the rhetoric that get a job done...it's the men and women that DO it that get it done...

 

ordinary as in there are a lot of soldiers...not ordinary as in an astronaut landing on the moon. ordinary doesn't mean bad, not good, not worthy of respect, it just means ordinary.

 

yes, person of year is the person that has most impacted the news/the us/the world in the past year. american soldier is not even a real person. it's like declaring "freedom" person of the year. sounds good, but it's really lame imho.

 

People have difficulty understanding the fact that Times person of the year does not always mean a good person. How can one agree to call the soldiers person of the year when they were just doing their job, albeit a dangerous one. No one here is putting the soldiers down. All you have to do is ask yourself who in the past year has impacted the world, for better or worse. In other words for 2003 the "cause" of all the chaos not the "effect".
just my 0.02